The Pictorial Cycle and Iconographic Practices of Cambridge, University Library, Kk.1.7

By: Dana Malefakis

MS Kk.1.7 contains The Pilgrimage of the Soul – the Middle English adaptation of Guillaume de Deguilleville’s fourteenth-century poem Le Pèlerinage de l’Âme. All of the extant manuscript copies of the Soul reserve space for illustration, indicating that miniatures played an integral role in the manuscript tradition of the Soul. Close comparison of the scenes chosen for illustration reveals an archetypal programme of illustration. Most copies show preparation or completion of twenty-six scenes, and these scenes show a high degree of consistency in subject and, often, iconography.[i] In Kk.1.7, a total of seventeen scenes are illustrated, and possibly one or two others are missing due to loss. The illustrator made critical decisions not only about which moments of the narrative would receive greater emphasis, but also about the iconography of these scenes, thereby deciding how they were presented and constructing reader responses. 


CUL, Kk.1.7, fol. 1r. Copyright Cambridge University Library

Much of the variation in Kk.1.7 might perhaps be attributed to the strong associations of the illustrated scenes with visual iconography, as seen in medieval pictorial representation and also in medieval drama.[ii] Rather than offering a faithful representation of the text, many of the miniatures rely on conventional pictorial prototypes and draw on extratextual traditions. The first illustration depicts the figure of Death piercing the sleeper with a spear, while the naked soul with hands in prayer is lifted up from his sleeping body into the clouds by the hands of God (fol. 1r). The motif of the departing soul with hands in prayer being carried into the heavens was popular between the fourteenth and sixteenth centuries, particularly in the prominent Ars moriendi tradition, which was heavily illustrated in England.[iii]

CUL, Kk.1.7, fol. 3v. Copyright Cambridge University Library

The angel and devil then lead the soul to judgement, and the soul is placed between them in the composition (fol. 3v), which recalls common medieval representations of the allegorical battle between good and evil, as illustrated fully in The Castle of Perseverance, a morality play of the early fifteenth century that visually ‘stages’ the division between a good advisor and an evil advisor.[iv]

CUL, Kk.1.7, fol. 7r. Copyright Cambridge University Library

The third miniature, on fol. 7r, is the presentation of the soul for judgement, and the proceedings are to be presided over by archangel Michael, as he ‘hast promyss’ to the ‘souerayn king to do iustyce and ȝeue iugement to all maner of peple’ (lines 16, 17-18 on fol. 4v). However, Michael is not depicted.

The illustrator adopts the authoritative tradition of Christ as Judge, figured as a Man of Sorrows, one of the most popular devotional images.[v] As is standard of the tradition, Christ’s arms are raised to show the stigmata, his bleeding side wound is exposed, and his face drips with blood from his piercing crown of thorns. The tiered angels flanking Christ enthroned on a rainbow and the inclusion of the trumpet also mirror depictions of the Last Judgement. The depictions of this scene in the other witnesses are precisely referential to the text. The scene in Kk.1.7 is not entirely responsive to the text, and its iconography refers to extratextual traditions. Christ in this scene attains greater visual potency than Michael. 

CUL, Kk.1.7, fol. 32v. Copyright Cambridge University Library

In another scene, however, on fol. 32v, the soul’s merits are weighed against his sins, and Michael is depicted instead of Justice, who is rendered prominently in most of the other witnesses. The iconography of Michael holding the scales was prevalent in medieval English wall paintings and reflects this illustrator’s tendency to conform to pictorial iconographic formulae.[vi]

CUL, Kk.1.7, fol. 46r. Copyright Cambridge University Library

As the pictorial cycle progresses, scenes of torture abound. One such scene (fol. 46r) purports to show ‘þe schap of þe firof purgatory’. The other manuscripts that illustrate this scene are consistent. They present the soul on his back ensconced in flames within concentric circles.[vii] The equivalent miniature in Kk.1.7 diverges from this treatment, as it shows a devil blowing the flames of Purgatory at two souls. This iconography is more generalised, for the torment of sinners in Hell was a well-worn theme with a varied iconography in the visual arts. 

CUL, Kk.1.7, fol. 37v. Copyright Cambridge University Library

In the Hell visions of Saint Paul and of Saint Patrick, sinners are shown suspended by different body parts above fire.[viii] The illustrator of Kk.1.7 adopted this iconography twice, as four souls on fol. 37v and three souls on fol. 56r hang from hooks by various limbs above a blazing fire. 

The subjects of the programme of the Soul manuscripts that have been omitted in Kk.1.7 did not typically appear in medieval visual arts, and so they do not carry the same visual associations as the previously mentioned subjects in Kk.1.7. There was no established iconography associated with the figure of Lady Liberality, for instance, and the scene in which the soul hears the story of Lady Liberality is not included in Kk.1.7. Other scenes are omitted in favour of ones with greater visual resonance. The scenes in which Justice testifies against the soul, Mercy pleads in the soul’s defense, and Christ’s grace outweighs the soul’s sins are not included in Kk.1.7, though they appear in many of the other witnesses. The scene in which the soul sees people he knew on earth does not have a set iconography in pictorial representation and is again omitted in Kk.1.7. 

The fact that illustrations were conceived as a part of the manuscript tradition of the Soul and that the miniatures in Kk.1.7 are associated with visual iconographies would suggest that there was a desire to emphasise the visual and encourage the visualisation of the ‘pilgrimage of the soul’. Connections to extratextual traditions would have been readily made by means of the miniatures in Kk.1.7. The miniatures may have then functioned as complementary extensions of the text, as aids to meditative activity. The function of miniatures in late medieval English vernacular literary manuscripts cannot be generalised, but close analysis of those in the individual witnesses of a text is essential. Slight variations in the choice and treatment of the miniatures should be considered, for even minor differences would have offered a different experience for the reader. 


[i] For a chart of the subjects chosen for illustration in each of the Soul manuscripts, see Rosemarie Potz McGerr, The Pilgrimage of the Soul: A Critical Edition of the Middle English Dream Vision, 2 vols (New York: Garland, 1990), I, pp. xlvii-xlix.  

[ii] Connections between Le Pèlerinage de la Vie Humaine and medieval drama have been discussed by Edgar T. Schell, ‘On the Imitation of Life’s Pilgrimage in “The Castle of Perseverance”’, The Journal of English and Germanic Philology, 67 (1968), 235-248. 

[iii]See David W. Atkinson, ‘The English ars morendi: Its Protestant Transformation’, Renaissance and Reformation, 6 (1982), 1. 

[iv] See Schell, 241.

[v]  See Catherine R. Puglisi and William L. Barcham, eds., New Perspectives on the Man of Sorrows (Kalamazoo: Medieval Institute Publications, 2013). 

 [vi] See Richard F. Johnson, Saint Michael the Archangel in Medieval English Legend (Woodbridge: Boydell Press, 2005), p. 148. 

 [vii] Descriptions of the depictions of this scene in the other manuscript copies of the Soul are reported in Lesley Suzanne Lawton, ‘Text and Image in Late Medieval English Vernacular Literary Manuscripts’ (unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of York, 1982), p. 125. 

 [viii]See Jan N. Bremmer, ‘Christian Hell: From the Apocalypse of Peter to the Apocalypse of Paul’, Numen, 56 (2009), 308. 



MS Ee.4.32 and the Case of the Disappearing ‘Pope’

Cambridge University Library, Ee.4.32

Chronicle

English and Latin

s.xv2

MS Ee.4.32 contains two texts: The Three Kings of Cologne and the English Prose Brut Chronicle. Renown Brut scholar Lister Matheson asserts that: ‘The Middle English prose Brut survives in more manuscripts than any other Middle English work except the two Wycliffite translations of the Bible’[1]. Matheson’s compiled catalogue of the Brut lists nineteen extant versions of the Latin Brut[2], forty-nine versions of the Anglo-Norman Brut[3], and over one-hundred-seventy versions of the Middle English Brut[4]. For a complete list and location of these manuscripts, please see Matheson’s monograph The Prose Brut: The Development of a Middle English Chronicle. 

The Brut Chronicle features just two instances of strikethrough. There are, however, a number of instances where the word ‘pope’ seems to have been first erased and then re-entered into the text. This phenomenon begins on fol.82r, within the rubrication ‘How Stephene of Langetoun come in to Engelonde through the pope commandement and thaune he wente aȝenſ one aftere’. 

This pattern of erasure—through a careful combination of liquid (which has, in places, left smudged ink) and scraping (which has, in other places, left the membrane rougher and lighter) continues up through fol. 87r, through the end of  the rubrication ‘How þe clerkes þat were outlawed of Engelonde come aȝen ond how kyng John was aſſaillede’, and then further on into the rubrication on fol. 88v, well into the body text of fol.90r. 

This pattern is particularly intriguing because it appears that just one hand is responsible for reintroducing ‘pope’ into the text; the word is written quite distinctly. The lobe of the letterform ‘p’ extends so far backwards that it crosses the stem, creating what in several instances could be mistaken for a ligature. This, combined with the distinctive ‘e’: sometimes backwards, at times upside-down and elongated, at the end of each ‘pope’ makes for an easily distinguishable difference between this word and its surrounding text.

EE.4.32 was copied onto membrane. The quality of the decorations, particularly in the Brut text (which include gold-gilt ornamentation and a variety of colored inks) indicate that this manuscript was of some worth at its time of production—making any word erasures particularly apparent. Western Illuminated Manuscripts: A Catalogue of the Collection in Cambridge University Library dates MS Ee.4.32 to the 15th century, citing either half of the century as likely dates of production…leading to questions about whether this is perhaps a Reformation-era tinkering with the text. Erasures are especially apparent in those sections detailing the (mis)adventures of King John; is there a reason these headings specifically have been so methodically revised? And what might prompt another owner, reader, or otherwise handler of this manuscript to ink the word ‘pope’ back into its place(s)? 

Questions abound…but the research continues! 

Research conducted as part of the M.Phil in English: Medieval and Renaissance Literature, Faculty of English, University of Cambridge.


Notes:

[1] Lister M. Matheson, The Prose Brut: The Development of a Middle English Chronicle (Tempe, AZ: Arizona Center for Medieval and Renaissance Studies, 1998), p.ix

[2] Ibid, p. xx.

[3] Ibid, p. xvii. 

[4] David Ruddy, ‘The Brut Chronicle’, University of Michigan (1996) <https://quod.lib.umich.edu/b/brut/about/>.  [Accessed 2020]. 

An Introduction to Biocodicology and the Beasts 2 Craft Project

The life of a book holds many stories, all leaving an invisible signature trapped in the pages, waiting to be read by those with the keenest eye. However, what if an eye is not enough? Invisible traces have seemed impossible to recover, but this is all changing with recent technological advances available to us. The emerging field of Biocodicology1 offers the tantalising prospect to read these long forgotten biographies, revealing complex stories of use, handling, storage and production.

But why is this relevant? What can we really learn that cannot already be ascertained from reading the text? The value of the materiality of manuscript production cannot be overstated. Understanding the craftsmanship involved in the production of materials, so intrinsically linked to the users themselves, are as much a part of the codex as the words inscribed on the page. Understanding book production in terms of the livestock economies that sustained them, the choice of animals (age, sex, breed), the idocincracies of each skin requiring specialist knowledge of treatment and production. But then there are additional stories imprinted on the completed text, how was it being used? Were these objects of reverence with barely a scratch as proof of their sacred status, or are they everyday books to be used and thumbed and splashed and cleaned? Much the same way as our favourite recipe books contain evidence of the ingredients we use, manuscripts may present similar signatures from their users, a drop of wine here, a stain of milk there, a veritable feast of biomolecules preserved for posterity, lying dormant waiting to be revealed.

Where were these books kept? In pristine condition in a specialist box away from the light and water and dirt that might transform them? Or were they accidental victims of severe weather conditions, flood or fires? All these situations can leave traces behind that we can now explore.

And what of the creatures living on the leaves? Bacteria and fungi are as much a part of the story as anything else, and can give us clues as to the storage environments of these objects, in addition to offering us the possibility of early diagnosis of detrimental strains that may need to be considered by the conservation teams.

These are some of the questions we are beginning to ask and trying to answer in the field of biocodiciology. Encompassing genetic, proteomic and lipid analysis, all these biomolecules are now accessible to us in a way that they never were before, and they are shining a light on some of the questions we perhaps thought could never be answered.

Emma Nichols from the Cambridge University Library talking to students about her ongoing role as a conservator collaborating with the B2C team

However, we would like to present biocodicology not just as new scientific techniques to be applied to cultural heritage objects, but rather as a true multidisciplinary field, needing the relevant expertise from manuscript scholars, scientists, conservators, digital analysts and crafter practitioners. It is a constant dialogue between the fields of what is wanted, what is needed and what is possible, each informing the others and enhancing their potential in ways that would otherwise not have been thought possible.

Biocodicology offers the possibility of conducting research in a way that compliments and integrates with the current methodologies, expanding the potential questions that can be answered. Using these techniques we have addressed a long held debate regarding the materiality of 13th C pocket bibles 2, explored the production history of the York Gospels 3 and participated in the complete 360 analysis of a 12th century glossed gospel of St Luke 4. All of these projects have required collaboration between scholars from many different disciplines to be able to resolve the questions originally posed.

Dr Sarah Fiddyment in her labs showing one of the many parchments she has sampled.

Over the years, we have amassed a large amount of data, particularly relating to parchment species, with over 5000 separate samples being analysed. This is starting to reveal a geographic pattern of species choice that could prove very useful in questions of origin and provenance. We are continually fostering new collaborations to expand the field and the data we acquire, so that it becomes more relevant with each sample added.

Part of the reason we have been able to access so many documents is due to the non-invasive sampling technique we developed alongside book conservators, using triboelectric extraction. This involves using a pvc-eraser to lightly wipe the surface of the parchment, and from the small crumbs generated we are able to extract enough proteins and DNA for subsequent analysis.

Broadly, the main techniques that are used in biocodicology are:

  1. Protein analysis: including Peptide Mass Fingerprinting (eZooMS) and proteomic analysis. This allow us determine the species of animal used to make the parchment, assess the quality of production (related to lime exposure) and analyse surface treatments and/or stains (deposits from plants, medicines, or human touch)
  2. Genetic analysis: both animal and microbiome. This gives further detail about the animal source, such as sex and sometimes breed, and offers the possibility of broad geographic provenance. The microbiome can inform about the environment the object has been stored in and potentially diagnose problematic microorganisms present.
  3. Visual analysis: including transmitted light photography and macro lens photography. This gives crucial information regarding the preparation of the parchment, the choice of animal, the method of production and possibly even evidence of breed (in the case of sheep due to the presence of hair follicles).
  4. Lipid analysis: currently under development. Analysing the fats present in the parchment offers the possibility of looking at climate signals and possibly dating.
  5. Craft practice and recreation: allows us to gain further insight into the production of parchment, recipes, choice of skins, etc based on the limited documentation that is available. Through trial and error using experimental recreation not only can we gain further understanding in the nuances of parchment making but we can also create control data sets for our analytical procedures.  
Dr Jiří Vnouček, conservator and part of the the B2C team, demonstrating traditional parchment manufacture at the medieval market in Gasir, Iceland

Beasts to Craft is an ERC funded advanced investigator grant, awarded to Professor Matthew Collins, that brings together a large group of scholars from different disciplines to develop and establish the field of Biocodicology. Although the project consists of a european network of participants, part of the team, including myself, are based in Cambridge at the McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research. A biochemist by training, I have spent the last eight years working on the protein analysis of parchment, and I will continue to carry out this facet of the project here in Cambridge. In addition to the protein analysis we also carry out the genetic analysis of parchment, headed by my colleague Dr Matthew Teasdale, originally a cattle geneticist but also having branched out into parchment analysis over the last eight years. We are always open to new collaborations so please do not hesitate to contact us if you have any questions or would like to discuss participating in our project.

Dr Sarah Fiddyment is a postdoctoral research associate on the ERC Beasts to Craft project based at the McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research, University of Cambridge.

This project has received funding from the European Union’s EU Framework Programme for Research and Innovation Horizon 2020 under Grant Agreement No. 787282. 

Further reading

1. Fiddyment, S. et al. So you want to do biocodicology? A field guide to the biological analysis of parchment. Heritage Science 7, 35 (2019).

2. Fiddyment, S. et al. Animal origin of 13th-century uterine vellum revealed using noninvasive peptide fingerprinting. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 112, 15066–15071 (2015).

3. Teasdale, M. D. et al. The York Gospels: a 1000-year biological palimpsest. R Soc Open Sci 4, 170988 (2017).

4. Gibbons, A. Goats, bookworms, a monk’s kiss: Biologists reveal the hidden history of ancient gospels. Science (2017).